[indiscernible chatter] announcer: on this tuesday evening, we are live in washington. and is the arena stage,

coming up tonight, a forum on the future of race relations in america. among those expected to speak, several university scholars and leaders of advocacy groups and questions this evening from the audience this conversation is getting underway. >> good evening, ladies and gentlemen. [applause] thank you. welcome to arena stage and our civil dialogue. deputy director here. how many of you have been to the arena stage before? fantastic! welcome back. i thought i would give you context about civil dialogue programs that we are doing at the arena stage. a few months ago. the professor sitting behind me to my right approached us feeling frustrated, like many of us were, about the lack of civil dialogue in our nation. and how polarized we seem to be.

this could be a place for civil dialogue to take place where we deliberately bring people together with multiple perspectives on the topic that might be difficult to discuss. and engage in the act of listening and speaking with one another, civilly, and when we got approached about this, this felt like a good match with our mission, because at the theater company, that is what we strive to do everyday in our shows. put up ideas on stage, gather a community in the audience and hopefully leave the theater with conversation. so, we thought, would people come to dialogues without the show? we did a couple of tests, this is the third of the tests and i'm pleased to see so many of you here. i'm pleased to see the answer is yes, people are hungry for this. we are going to continue these dialogues into the late summer

and fall. at the back of your programs, you will see the list of upcoming dialogues. dialogue, to about whet your conversation maker, i would ask you to turn to somebody near you, hopefully somebody you did not come here with, and share -- we will only take 30 seconds, share why you came with one another. go ahead and take 30 seconds for that sharing. [indiscernible chatter]

seema: wonderful. wonderful, so hopefully, you already had an opportunity to meet someone new this evening. and, just a reminder to turn off your cell phones or any other noisemaker you have on you, and

a special thanks to c-span who is covering this dialogue. without further ado, me turn this over to the professor who will shepherd us through this conversation. doctor? [applause] >> thank you very much. it is greatly appreciated, the decision of the arena stage to extend and give us an opportunity to continue conversation with you. proceed, i need to ask you all to indulge me one minute , because i want to talk for one minute about a subject we will not discuss tonight. and a humanant being in america, disregard the fact that our government takes children away from the parents, many of them younger than for an incarcerates them separately

and, even sometimes after their immigration status is cleared, they still have a hard time uniting with their children. past, these children ended up as human traffickers. i'm not going to tell you what to feel, but i thought i would share my feeling. i hope i can hear yours. now, what we tried to do in the series, is two things at the same time. to show people come from different backgrounds and different viewpoints can have a civil dialogue, and we tried it twice before, but today, is by far our most challenging topic. i call on each other to have a frank conversation but one that is mostly respectful. second, a topic for tonight is, what we envision race

relationships should be in the united states 30 years from now, in 2015 or so -- 2050 or so and how we were going to get there. in preparing myself tonight, i talked to a lot of people, some of you and some others. it's an extremely complicated issue. the media talks about black agents as if they are completely cases and therity differences in each community -- it is hard to believe it is true, you can see the difference among the communities. andcan americans cuban-americans are much farther apart and say mexican-americans and followers of bernie sanders. and so on.

foundations which keep coming up in the conversation, i would like to mention something before i turn it over to you. one issue coming up is, do we really want to aspire to a colorblind society? far, as more and more people integration is something most of us are losing faith in, and instead, we're thinking about the policy which is a race conscious policy. i'm not sure exactly what that means but that is what we are discussing. do the distinction between structural and personal. integrator extend that, what i mean, is to say, some people believe that if you work hard yourself, youte can pull yourself up with your

own bootstraps and, whatever things are in your way, and anointed person should be able to bulldozer ahead. some of the discussion came up under black fathers, and minorities -- and if minorities would do their thing, everything would be dandy. the structural idea is racism deeply embedded in our power structure, and our economy, and therefore, it is subject to view.dual another thing i found intriguing, class. avoid hand of people, to the bad class, discrimination,

we should really focus on helping all people. all disadvantaged people, disregarding the racial background. then, the push spec of this idea, minorities especially, african americans, suffer extra injustice. you won't be able to correct for the extra important imbalance. finally, and the one i find particularly intriguing was a controversials but i find it surprisingly helpful in this conversation, and that is check your privilege. some people take that to mean that white people should shut up because they have been

privileged for so long, it is a time for other people to speak. i just read a book called "so you want to talk about race," and the author explains, that is not what the phrase means. it means that white people feel they did better because they worked harder, save more, and such. they should check and see, to what degree they have extra achievements, and whether they are due to their own efforts or advantages that they had another people did not. to sum up the frameworks in which the conversation might be , we promise each other, you made a commitment that each of the speakers will speak only for five minutes in the first round and there are trapdoors. [laughter]

to save time, we will not introduce those speakers. you so much. it is wonderful to be here. professor and this distinguished panel, he posed a challenging question for us. i guess i would start by saying willhoping that by 2050 we be much further along in our race relations than we are today. that people will see the basic humanity in others that is lacking. today, many of you know roseann tweeted a horribly racist statement about valerie jarrett. , to my a president who mind, consistently and in a mind-boggling way denies that

humanity of others. a mexican-american judge cannot be fair, he says. muslims, immigrants should not be allowed into the country. these are astounding statements coming into the 21st century. so, we would be much further along in 2050. how to get there, i think, integration has a lot to do with it. i have spent the last 20 or 25 efforts tong about integrate schools at the k-12 level and at the elite college level. i am now starting to get into housing which is -- which lisa knows far more about than i do. at the end of the day, we want to be in a position where a

officeian, who runs for trying to denigrate and demographics -- and demonize other groups of people would be unsuccessful because everyone will have gone to schools and lived in neighborhoods where they know individuals from different backgrounds and would to paint aong it is broad brush about other people. effort,the integration and here i will probably be more controversial. i think we should emphasize issues of class as well as race. , the challengele of integrating our elite colleges. a place like harvard university is now majority minority.

thing, but wonderful what they tend to do is assemble wealthy students of all colors on their campus. so, they have built, in essence, a multiracial aristocracy. anch is better than all-white aristocracy, but it is still an aristocracy. at harvard, they have as many students coming from the top 1% by income as the bottom 60%. there are more students from the top 10% in the bottom 90%. is, our diversity efforts. , andthey ignore class white, working-class people recognize that. one of the most astounding polls i've ever seen was one in which white working-class voters now

say they are as likely to be discriminated against as african-americans. now, on one level, it is complete nonsense. -- we just know the names, all you had to say are the people who have faced racism and suffered terrible consequences because of it to know it is wrong for white, working-class people to say they are likely to be discriminated -- they are as likely to be discriminated against. having said that, the affirmative action programs, are geared exclusively toward race. forward, -- to move if we are going to move forward, we need to have programs integrating us by race and class, and pay special attention wemuch more attention than

have in the past two issues of economic equality -- inequality. that is where martin luther king was headed toward the end of his e'se, as a poor peopl campaign. it is where reverend barber is headed in trying to resurrect the poor people's campaign. i just think that is where we need to go to become a truly united country in years to come. >> greetings everyone. what do i want this world to look like in 2050? i would like to be in a world and not be exhausted. dealing with white supremacy is taxing, emotionally, mentally, physically. when you say the names tamir writes or others -- tamir writes rice, it is sickening. i would just like to be in the world, as complicated, or not -- asgether, or good as i

any other person could be and not be a reflection on my race or my community or say something about who i am. i want to not worry about the fact that i have a 14-year-old nephew who may not be knowledge as this beautiful boy who loves baseball and it's a good student and a thoughtful kid, who has a little sister at home in older brothers. the world may not see him the way i see him. that keeps me up at night. that scares me because, truth is, he can die, today, for doing nothing other than walking around, listening to his car radio, too loudly, listening to his earphones but not tearing someone to freeze or to stop. idea of the world i want to live in, um, black fears -- and i say black people

in particular because that is the community i come from and that is where i am speaking from and i have to be honest about that. black fears of white people are totally justified. white fears of black people are not. this narrative of black criminality that is allowed to justify our murders, our detentions, the dignity of being pulled over and put on the curb, pulled aside in the metro station, being accused in a store of theft and being followed around because someone think you might feel something. i got the talk from my parents, when you go to the store, keep your hands out of your pockets, have your money in your hand when you approached the counter. do not put anything in a bag or it -- bag. buy, dony, go to best you need a receipt, i need a bag, with a receipt stable to the outside.

quite years to a certain extent over the ways in which those poor whites in particular have been coddled because a part of what i think is what gets us to this better place is we have to and white supremacy. that is not a white people problem, that is in all of us problem. i think we all do various things to prop up white supremacy. part of that is the talk we had to give our children. that is the reality of life we live. we should be able to tell people, you're going to the store, live your life. walk-in as entitled as anybody else. get whatever else you want. that, we have to and that investment into white supremacy. this belief white people are superior, even for poor whites. that has walked them away from policies that could have helped them, because they were invested in it. i think we have to talk about

this wealth cap that is growing and not closing. it is getting bigger. asians, and that is a small -- not a small issue, but something like preparations is going to be something we need to talk about. it is not a pleasant topic for most because people think they will lose something. but, you have to lose something to get something. if you want racial harmony, you have to do what the country has never done, try to remedyacial wrongs. yohad to try to lk about the educational gap closing. that if you just go to school, if you just make the right choices, you do late marriage, pregnancy, invest in your careers, you'll be fine. but we look at student loan the nomineeample, for the democratic governor of georgia had to answer for why he still has 100,000 or more dollars in debt.

part of that is education and caring for parents. she comes from a not wealthy family. we have to have full voting rights for the first time. we have never had full voting rights in this country and i think that is a conversation we have to have. we have to end it. some of the qualities that scare me is something we have to talk a lot -- talk about along with housing. and that is my five minutes? seema: you are doing very well -- dr. etzioni: you're doing very well. [applause] >> this question is existential for me. wat i do on a daily basis hich was already alluded to is tackling fair housing issues. --ob is to remedy revenue segregation in america which was

something that was constructed, orchestrated, designed. are more residentially segregated today than we were 100 years ago. we are residentially segregated in many of our cities, many of the northern cities, chicago, etc., areilwaukee, hyper segregated. we are segregated as a society many practices and policy that are put into place that created separate and unequal societies. when i tell people that we are more segregated today than we were 100 years ago, people don't believe me. it, andyou think about go back and look at the history of america, and where african-american people lived, where white people lived, where native americans lived, etc., in

terms of proximity to one another, 200 years ago, 150 years ago, etc., you will see that that statement is true. how do we come from being a society that was not hyper segregated but had it very much real class and caste system to a community that is hyper segregated. we did that, because at the end of slavery, white people, because of white supremacy, felt if you are not beneath me, if i do not have this systemic caste m that designates you below me, then i can't have you living next door to me. we have got to separate you from me. from federal policies down to state policy, to local policy, our government but those policies into place to create separate and unequal societies.

that, because we are a residential segregated society, it has made it so much easy, for thean perpetuation and creation of all that niambi ity just talked about. access, homeowners disparities, all of that is made profoundly easier because of residential segregation. that is because, in the united states, it is linked with opportunity. where you live matters. if you give me your address, i can tell you how long you are going to live, and if you tell me where you live, i can tell you your credit score, changes of being incarcerated, the chance of your children graduating from high school or going on to get a higher education. what kind ofu

diseases you are most susceptible to if you just give me your address. that i somethi, in my aspiration, my 2050 aspiration, is completely undone. and unwound. we are living in my world by 2050, in communities that are open and fair, completely all of the where barriers of discrimination have been torn down. the second reason this is existential for me is because i did my dna test, my son and i. other and i, like every -- probably not every other, but most others overwhelmingly, the majority of african-americans in this country are interracial people. we come from a global society. when i look at my ancestry map,

it literally covered the globe. about the fact that my ancestors come from every ,pace, every place on the globe this whole question of what do race relations look like in 2050, just become so crazy. when you think about the reality of it also raises another interesting question. it is a question we talked about, appropriation. appropriating someone else's culture or ethnicity. if you are a multiracial person, and i it identify as african-american, but realizing that my ancestry is so diverse. if i decide to learn how to rain

dance, and my appropriating someone else's culture? my ancestors were probably rain dancers. upthis whole question opens a pandora's box for may. i will stop there because i think i have thrown out a lot of thoughts and ideas. when we talk about the question , when we thinkns about our own ancestry and where race,e from as a human that changes the paradox. it did for me and i think if other people thought about it, it would for them, as well. >> hello. it is hard to begin to have a conversation about this topic, but i think the creation of spaces where we can at least try is one of the critical points

about what is needed right now. this is particularly a fascinating, disturbing moment for somebody who works with a civil rights organization. we were talking about that earlier. some of the organizations in this country are turning 50 this year because 1968 was a very important year in the civil rights dimension. there were so many things in turmoil happening around the familiar to sounds what we are experiencing right now. about 2050, there are probably various ways i could think about what i would like to see, and at the core of these

things it is similar to what my fellow panelists would say. the more aspirational one would from a systemic and policy perspective, as well as an individual level, that the golden rule is something we are closer to getting ourselves by that is closer to our behavior. but is as individuals area also in the way that our systems, policies, institutions use their power. i think a later way to put that would be to say -- lighter way to put that would be to say that comedians of any background can make jokes about the latino community, and if i think the

jokes are hilarious, no matter what the joke is, i think that would be great. i would also like to be in 2050, and i think this echoes what others have said, where if i am having a discussion or part of a debate and there happens to be disagreement, one of the would be toitions go back to where you came from. even though they do not know where he am coming, they are making assumptions based on the color of my skin. timei would say that every i watch the news or hear a story about something or 70 who has done something wrong, at the myst thought that comes to mind is, please let it not be latino, black, or muslim. because these communities are gointo be iicted wholesale

for the action of an individual. so i am hoping that by 2050 we are not there anymore. with what has been put here, and this can be an overwhelming thing. i want to build on what has been said. at the end of the day, divided people -- and we are certainly ining policy and politics the weaponize and of divide and conquer. at the end of the day, divide and conquer, seating division between people is a pure form of control. i think we have seen the division. when you are trying to divide

people, designating a scapegoat and aggressor is an important part of the equation. i think in our country there have been some communities that have borne the brunt of that demonization for a long time. it has been institutionalized in many ways. bring the divide and conquer because i think that it purpose of it is to prevent equally situated people with equal concerns from coming together to hold accountable those who are actually inflicting the conditions. so i do see how class plays a role. at some point, because i am more of an advocate than intellectual , i think part of me is more focused on understanding that both player role.

-- play a role. one thing i would say is, sometimes the only thing that gets me through is to take the long view with the understanding that i am very impatient. by the long view i mean our country has had a very tortured history with many groups of people. we have not learned our lesson and there is a reason why divide and conquer comes up again and again. because we fall for it every time. us, one of the things we were thinking about is how these narratives and dividing cover politics are used to scare people about other people. and in that place of beer --

create an environment where people are willing to go along and condone the violations of rights of other people. whether it is mass incarceration, the separation of parents from children who are coming to the border to ask for asylum. things like that. and the fact that people at some point are willing to look the other way because they have been folkso be afraid of those or to become numb to it. scarcity gets compounded on us every day until we start believing it. sounds pretty dire. thatongview tells us eventually we come to our senses. we do not get all the way to where we need to go, but

to redress.e start the other good news is that at least 80% of americans are concerned about the tone of politics today. they are concerned about division. diversity isthat one of america's strengths. this is research we did last ,ear and i was very surprised because of what we had been seeing. the reason i mentioned that is that i feel are country is the equivalent of the child who goes to school and everywhere they you are stupid. you are not going to amount to anything. you are bad. what is happening is bad. the people around you are bad.

and you know what happens to that child. even though there are more children who looks is certain gets told that, it affects the child, no matter what color the child is. that is our country today. people are hearing it every day. that the way things are happening means that we have to make this country great again because it isn't and we should be afraid of what is. so to make a positive thing is that even in this toxic ,nvironment, which is not new that this administration is the result of decades of building up to this point. that is the moment of reflection. so the positive is that even , an all of the toxicity

overwhelming number of americans believe america is a strength. and if we do not do something about it, they will end up believing that you are stupid and bad and will not an amount to anything. that is the point of intervention for us and i think there are things we can all do. i will leave you with this example. we're highly segregated and the less you know about something, the more the wrong perceptive -- perception of that can take hold. we live in a very segregated country where stereotypes about others can take stronghold because we do not come into contact with people. , becauseided to start americans believe that diversity is a strength and they're concerned about what is happening, they want to thing about it. but it is hard to figure out what to do.

so think about small things all of us can do. while we continue to do the big things. that is creating spaces where people can break bread together. can share stories and create shared experiences that allow us to be an entry point to learn more about each other. it was in that spirit that organizations we work with decided to start setting an example and started hosting recipe events where they invited a diverse number of people in their communities to come together, right bread, and talk about food and what food means for them and their family. it is a way to engage in conversation. i think that is something we can all do as individuals. it is individual and institutional.

the policy and small action. >> hello. before i go forward to 2050, i would like to go back. i grew up in a small town in northern california, three hours north of san francisco. it had an extremely high unemployment rate. fewer than 10% of my high school class went to college. i was a young republican. i bought intall of these sml-town conservatism. why myot understand parents should not cross the picket line. my dad had a gun in the closet and i thought that made sense at the time. my world was one of racial stereotypes and i still recall a painful memory of talking with

my mexican-american boyfriend asking if our other friend knew he was mexican. he said, you know, mexican is not a bad word. that is who i would have been if i had not had an opportunity to learn from others and ask areas --e about race in america opportunity to learn from others and experience more about race in america. race is the social meaning that people attribute to our physical features. and chancesowerful are determined in many ways by

that social meaning. admit i see the world through a racial lens. report and richard's i wanted to be convinced about how we balance class and race and i would tip the scales little bit more towards race. when i look at the differential test scores in college admissions, i do not just attribute those test scores just to poverty and economic differences. i also think about implicit bias. that is something a class-based policy cannot do a good job with. students at the university of maryland, how many of you, if teachers thought you were really good at math. maybe half the asian-american

students raise their hands. you, a teacher implied that you are not good at school? every black student always raises their hand. when i travel across d.c., i see neighborhoods divided by class, but icd racial segregation -- i see deep racial segregation. and the last five years, racial discrimination. that is not something in the past. that is today. statistics on the that asiani see americans overall have a higher income than even whites in the united states. but i also know if you look within those categories, if you look at people who have the same

education, whites make more than asian-americans. usclass alone cannot absolve . as dr. perry has underscore, i am not driving attention to any racial differences or susceptibility to particular vulnerabilities based on physical features. i am drawing attention to differential rates of exposure to racism. so in my view the future of race relations in the u.s. really depends on our ability to talk about race and racism now and everyday. and it means for me being obsessed with race to some degree. so i would like to see a world in which we acknowledge as a society the work that racism

continues to do to create inequality, so we can get to the heart of the problem. does this mean we cannot always -- also consider class, gender, or immigration status? no. people who talk about race all the time are always the first to talk about gender and class and immigration status. they do not think of race is the only thing going on. but they think it is a really important fundamental part of the problem. so we have seen explicit, legally sanctioned racism decrease in our lifetime. what will it take to make further changes in the future? shows that white millennials have more in common

in terms of their ideas about race with other white people than they do with other non-white millennials. intervention,e an and it is not just generational change. i think that intervention is explicit racial policy that addresses racism. >> this is a fantastic panel. thank you so much. [applause] this exceeded what i expected in terms of hearing authentic voices. i am going to ask one question and invite guests to join the conversation.

i think you are more than able to handle it. i wanted to ask you what you are going to do about all of the whites? mean is you are talking about a major reallocation of wealth and power. when you talk about reparations, we're not talking about five dollars. we're talking about trillions. important,es more and so on. implies a you said major take from the whites. they have not been terribly accommodating.

-- we have seen backlash. when truck voters were asked, is your life like you are climbing up the hill and people keep getting ahead of you, is that what you feel? that is the way the majority of the white people felt. whites like to talk about equal opportunity, everybody should participate in the race. but if you discuss about the starting points, those who are disadvantaged are always going to lose the race. meaningful quality of

opportunities. so how are we going to get there? >> a lot of people think about reparations as a kind of impossible projects. but the fact is, when most people are talking about reparations, they are not actually talking about a dollar for dollar transfer. they are talking about expanding social safety nets, providing supportust programs to both people of color and poor people. it is more of a metaphor than an actual transfer of wealth. that is one thing. it is less of an impossibility than people believe because it is really about expanding government social services.

asian-americans have a lot of resources these days. but they are actually one of the groups that is most likely to be ok with raising taxes on the rich for middle-class tax cuts and they enforce a bigger government with more social services. so i notice not just about self-interest, it is about social interest and i think we can get there. where we going to do about whites? not every white is racist. we have to take that into it -- we have to take that into account. whites who will get on board and we cannot write them off. we do not win anything without winning progressive whites. i think there is a coalition of people of color and progressive whites and that is a possibility

in the future. revealink you actually part of the issue with the question itself. wehink a lot of times that attempt to have conversations about race relations, we attempt to have it in a binary us versus them. when people talk about multiculturalism or diversity, there is a sense that that means people of color. but diversity and multiculturalism means everybody. my thing about actually living to realize that called --

country we aspire to be and build an accurate story of that country is one that has a place for everybody. i think that the problem with these issues is that we tend to have them in ways that reinforce the division and antagonism to tackle them. i was in cap slated in a question, which is, in order to get this at her vision of what race relations will be in this country -- in order to get this better vision of what race relations will be in this country, what will we be done with rights -- whites? this notionnforces that this is about people of color, and that whites are simply a problem. i think we need to get past that

how to knock you late ourselves better -- in innoculate ourselves better. there is an incredible amount of people do not find ways to partner and work together. by saying that i am not being dismissive than in any way. i think the structural things that have been put in place to make that real are incredibly strong. with the way to preserve that

structure of racism is by making people complicit in the equation. so i think the partnership has in terms of, had we stop being complicit? four folks in the white folks who are suffering the same inequality of power in their poor communities where this is happening, but at the same time, too willing to go along with the human eyes nation of other folks to explain that away. we need to look at folks who are creating these conditions and why they are so intent on distracting us from coming together by turning us against each other. been democrats willing to do it.

right now we see a majority of republicans willing to do it. but i am not one to write either party off or absolve them completely, because i think they have to be held accountable. one is definitely leading the charge right now but i am not going to write people off because they identify as one party or another. we need to create a bigger space than that. so my first thought when you asked that question was that we have been transferring wealth throughout the entire history of our country. it has just been one way. a one-way street. white menit has been who have benefited from the transfer of wealth. when the u.s. was first forming, we invited folks to immigrate to

our nation. great britain established a system in the colonial time called head rights in which land was granted primarily to white men based on the number of people in household. familieshe way many who have been here for centuries gained land and wealth. it was given to them. not only that, but through the taxpayer system, everybody pay taxes and contributed to a militian which we armed to go in take property in land from some people to give it to others. we did that as a nation.

so we have been transferring wealth in the head rights system, then transferred rollover into the land grant system which rolled over into the homestead system, so throughout the entire history of the country, we have been transferring wealth. it has just not been transferred in a way that benefited us all. the largest transference of wealth was after the financial crisis when we the taxpayer bailed out wall street to the tune of trillions of dollars. one of the things we have to do is figure out away to educate the populace and to get the populace engaged. when you talk about these issues, if i hear one more time

that the community reinvestment act or affordable how -- housing goal caused the foreclosure crisis, i will screen. .cream wall street greed caused it. but we bailed out to the tune of trillions of dollars. a lot of people do not realize that when we established the money thatgram, that was given to goldman sachs and all the wall street players, you know they basically just paid each other off with that money. with our money. two years after the financial crisis, the wall street powerhouses were operating in the black. fully profitable. because we transferred our wealth to them. think we ha a

ndamental problem with the concept of transference of wealth. what we have a problem with is who is getting the money transferred. that is the paradigm we have to change. that change comes from policy changes, education, advocacy, and holding each other accountable. i have told you accountable and you have told me accountable. do isher thing we need to change our system. say we had reparations where we actually transferred money, monetary assets, two people who have been underserved in the united states. in five years, all of the money would be transferred back to the most wealthy in the nation.

s areis because our system designed to funnel wealth away from some and to others. it is the way the system is constructed. look at the credit system, the financial system, the criminal justice system. look at the educational system. go through and look at every system in the nation. designed,tus is constructed to strip wealth from the masses and funnel it to the few. that is something we have to actually change, fundamentally overall all of those systems so we can have more equality and equity in our society. repeat what lisa

said, she said it well. we actually do this on a raise -- regular basis. we call it reparations but you can call it corporate welfare or whatever you want. it is the same idea. when i am talking about reparation, i am talking about a legitimate repair of communities that are damaged. we know we have done this. we know we denied black farmers. we know what that caused. black families lost property. they lost wealth. we know the wilmington race riots. people got out of town. was a realternment harm the we said we have to repair. so it does not necessarily have to come in a cash payment. there are number of ways we can get creative about how we do

this. some came in the form of educational ridge asked. we do not lack for creative solutions. what we lack is the political will. changing people's mind is the difficult part. you want people to think about this as you are taking from me to give to something else. and it is not just something else, it is somebody i think is undeserving. when i say reparations, no one else in here is thinking about to native american people who had their land stripped or community destroyed. .obody is thinking about that is one of the most

fundamental relationships in this country that needs to be worked out. -- did just not have to be but it does not have to be a direct cash payment. even if there were reparations in some form given, we have all paid into them. we have all paid into that system. so i do not think it is about what to do with white. we have to do a better of thinking of thinking througs restorative justice. i do not think we give that part of the conversation in this race. that doe communities not have proper dental care. their communities did not end up that way by accident. but i think in the case of talking about something like

reparation, it is not a term that is owned by a black people. we have to be color conscious and how we do it because we all face these kinds of economic hardships differently. our communities look different. words seven and eight look like next to wards one and three. that is not by accident. so what works for one community will not work for another. color consciousness has to be part of that conversation. the country has never had an issue with making policies and hoping the country goes with politicians. politicians make the policy in the country follows. i think there are a lot of things we pay for all the time so i do not see why this cannot

be another of those. >> your challenge to me was a little different, about how we get to class-based affirmative action in college admissions. very rightbstacles now, according to william bone. william bowen, the biggest preference is given to athletes. important was under representative -- underrepresented minorities. third was legacies, the children of alumni. it is outrageous. they get a 20 percentage point increase. low income students got no bump up whatsoever. universities do not

consider class in admissions. how do we goon is, about getting change on that issue? think universities are going to makes you much on their own, because they have incentives for racial diversity, because race is a lot more visible than class to the naked eye. there are interest groups .ushing for racial diversity it is not that expensive to bring in wealthy students of all colors. class faces all sorts of obstacles. race ands visible than much more expensive because you have to give financial aid to the students. so the only lever for change or have seen make a real difference where, usuallys

by voter initiative, people have said you cannot use race in admissions. then suddenly, universities discover class. not because they are interested in class diversity per se, but because it is the next best way to get racial diversity. see in state after state where affirmative action was banned by race, that administrators did not simply give up on racial diversity. they said, let's find new ways to get there. and they made sure they provided new preferences based on class. so to my mind, there is this bizarre situation where a conservative decision to take away race and sub with a progressive result where we finally pay attention to cls.

>> there were a lot of good points and i will make my contribution. there are two microphones, can we change the lights we can see -- so we can see people? i cannot see you. would you stand? i want to thank you for a

great panel. last week there was a lawsuit filed against the district of columbia government for her patch waiting a series of economic development policies of the years that had discriminated against people of color. my question is, what can be done to take advantage of this desire to invest in the district so we get more equitable development? gentrification, others: ethnic cleansing. ethnicrs call it

cleansing. think we are moving into an american plutocracy and there are all kinds of movement underground that are radically changing the structure of the relationships in our society, where everybody is going to be affected by this concentration of wealth. behind in order to get -- get beyond, we have to get ahead. i do not know how to do that but it needs to be incorporated into how we define the problem. i will tackle the first one because there are fair housing issues woven in. there are all kinds of strategies for making sure economic development can be done in an equitable fashion. iii, particularly if there are federal funds involved in the development, you can that underserved groups

are actually employed in the development or construction of or that underserved communities are going to be employed after the businesses or retail are constructed and set up. sure you aremake giving opportunities for small businesses to have an opportunity to be a part of the development. there are all kinds of programs. some people may refer to them as minority enterprise business thatopment programs require that minority owned businesses have a shot at taking part of the development. when you talk about housing development programs, you can of there that a slice

new houses developed are affordable and that the residents who formerly lived in the neighborhood or community ate a first right of refusal the new housing units that come on the market. columbia doesf have these programs i mentioned. the problem is enforcement. if you do not have enforcement of the good policies and program emma you are just going to end up with the same result. -- policies and program, you are just going to end up with the same result. i want to jump in. claudia point your finger on something really important.

these concentrations of wealth. i had a piece in the new york times about robert kennedy's 1968 campaign for president where he brought together african-american voters and working-class whites, including a lot of people that ended up voting for george wallace. he did it at a time of great economic prosperity and equality. lowgini index was at a point. is whether this concentration of wealth and poverty will finally open the back the coalition he was able to put together. from a logical standpoint, it ought to be easier to do now than it was 50 years ago.

>> i want to thank everyone of the panelists for all you have contributed to this discussion. this question is for ms. carter. you opened up your discussion with such urgency about our is killingnd how it me goodbye day. i want to go back to that with this racial issue. and it a system problem is killing people at alarming rates. it is killing our black men. day, the system is killing. i would like you to speak a becauseit more to that,

it is not about repairing the system. america is not working. it is not working. people are dying because of it. taken blacknot allocation.f the what is the question for america? , have you really think about black people? people of color? of your system and everything you are navigating around is the answer to that question. >> thank you for your question. it is urgent.

it is not just killing black men and boys, is killing black women and girls. we are in a city where black women are much likelier to die giving birth. think you are right, the system is broken. repair, i talk about repairing the people. i don't think we can repair the system. think the psychological and emotional parts of this, the stress of this, kills people. heartedness,broken i do not think we give enough credit to melancholy and oppression and stress, obesity emma diabetes, high blood pressure. these things kill people. maternal health.

it has been suggested that you can pass stress along to your babies. so this is a sickness that happens. i do not know if i am being coherent. i was brought up like most people. you make the right choices and decisions and life will open up for you. i did all of that. i went to college. i did not have children young or out of wedlock. i went to graduate school. i got a job and i am employed and i pay my taxes and student loans. and i'm like, 40, where is all the other stuff that was supposed to happen for me? i delayed having children. had, but an issue i lot of women are likely. -- are like me. i did not buy my first home until i was 40.

because in this city, it is difficult. i had good credit. i did all the things were supposed to do. so the point i guess i want to make is, i feel it. i feel it talking to you right now. as much as into the -- as much as i can put it into pretty words, the truth is white supremacy kills people every day. from smoking to drinking, all the things people do to cope, it is a public health concern. racism is a public health issue, just like diabetes. these things are all connected. >> thank you very much. thank you very much for everything you have and should -- everything you have shared. what you thought

about what we can look to when we talk about the vision. paralyzing it can be because we talk about what we are running from. we know what is not working. but who can we look to as an example, what pockets of society are there places where the vision you are talking about is working? what countries do we see that are racially diverse that still have high trump index? trust index? who can we look to? >> another question, please. >> thank you for the panel. it is lopsided.

. am white the three elements that i feel are missing from the room, first of all, the more diversity a society has, the less social social cohesion the country has. is yes, therem are differences within races. however there are realities of cultural differences between the groups. 400 swiss people on a desert

island, come back one year later and see what happens. with 100me thing africans. come back a year later and see what happens. see what kind of society you have. statistician and i see the demographic trend. if cultural groups do not clean up their acts, i will tell you what will happen in society. >> i am exhausted by that question. it is provocative in the worst way. look. i can't. i just can't. i can attempt to be nice about

it, but that question is loaded with so much garbage that does not actually need to be unpacked, and i am not going to do it. this is a civil dialogue and i am being as civil as i can be. you give too many passes. it is not a legitimate question. what are you saying about people's values? there are no black values, only white values? yes people might have cultural things, but the moment we decide that your cultural values makes person, i am not going to begin a conversation that racialse diversity is problematic.

the other man had a question about countries that are doing it well. i do not know of a country that is doing it well. >> i want to jump in with a couple of things. first of all, i agree with one part of that comment, which is that the panel is lopsided. i agree with that. i can also defend it, but i agree. to be fair on that. i do think that some of the comments that were made are an example of the things that people buy into hook line and sinker without doing a lot of thinking. so this notion that diversity leads to less cohesion can be proven wrong. there were some circular arguments in that.

argued that belonging to a particular group means there is a monolithic thinking in that group. so i am not sure why we need to debate that. coming from the latino community, which many people rerd as a manama -- monith but is actually diverse, i would be the first one to challenge that. but the one thing i would say is, let's take the latino community as an example. latino is an american construct. the tino's are u.s. based like me who are of hispanic origins and would be from a number of class, racial makeups, language. some latinos have been here

since before the birth of the nation, some are first generations. the majority of latinos are united states citizens. everybody -- even though all latinos -- even though some people think all latinos do not belong. those are the narratives that are woven into our society. we are not born thinking that we are different and there is less cohesion. we are led in that direction. so this notion that diversity by itself leads to less cohesion would argue that division is an organic thing, but it isn't. >> thank you. >> one quick, optimistic thing. [laughter] i think this other question

does not deserve response. but there are 100 school districts in this country that are now trying to bring kids of different backgrounds together, looking at economic status and race and talking with the students in those schools gives me a lot of hope. there is now a real effort to support diversity and it is student led. that is where i get my optimism. >> one more question. >> hello. i want to ask about the idea of culture as a commodity.

we are currently experiencing economic change and something that could become a political change. there is this idea -- if you express these different attempts at urban development as cultural tourism, -- butso can be a word at the same time you can have a shuttle that goes to southwest areas. you are completely missing the areas that are of lower economic value. accessibility is from point a to point b. at the same time, point a is this very extensive -- expensive hotel to the smithsonian museum. you have this creative cultural expression, you have the cultural values --

announcer: as this event winds up, a reminder we will have it later in our schedule. utahwe take you live to for the debate in be senate primary with mitt romney and utah state lawmaker mike kennedy. the campus of brigham young university, the utah debate commission welcomes you to the senate republican primary candidates debate. ♪ [laughter] -- [applause] >> welcome.